Philosophy, History and Science
Henry Ford, the father of modern assembly lines used in mass production, became one of the richest and popular persons in the world. He was a productive inventor and was awarded 161 U. S. patents. He was also the founder of Ford Motor Company in America. He was credited for” Fordism”, a mass production of reasonably priced automobiles using assembly lines. Ford left most of his vast wealth to the Ford Foundation but arranged for his family to take care of the business permanently.
He was a pioneer of welfare capitalism and believes that “Efficiency meant hiring and keeping the best workers”. In an interview with Charles Wheeler of the Chicago Tribune in 1916, Ford stated that “History is more or less a bunk”. His statement has made people think about what he really meant. This quotation denotes that one should be living in the present situation, not in the past. Individuals are fond of searching and studying where and when everything existed. His philosophy states that History is a tradition that is not even vaguely reliable.
Individuals deal with hypothetical researches, probabilities and prediction in order to learn lessons about the History. History deals with tradition – past experiences and beliefs. Ford believes that in order for someone to succeed, one has to not care too much about traditions. Individuals should think more of making history out of great things or discoveries that can be done at the present time. His philosophy is quite true and effective, but there still are things that can be considered useful when dealing with the past experiences. Everybody learns with their past experiences.
Seeing through the past could make a person know better and become better. It still depends on how an individual treats learning and living. The important thing to remember is to know what really is true or untrue and to be careful in making decisions. One should know what historical information is/are factual, reliable and useful. Henry Ford embodied the real meaning of successful Americanism. He said his famous line to remind the individuals work for the present and future time and not to be pessimistic and be bothered with the happenings done before.
His statement was for the Americans and the American traditions. He wanted to share his principles on how he became successful and wealthy. 2. Science is the concentrated human attempt to comprehend, or to understand better, the history of the natural world and how the natural world performs, with observable physical substantiation as the source of that understanding. It is prepared through observation of natural phenomena, and/or through experimentation that strives to simulate natural processes under controlled circumstances.
Individuals do science to be able to gather information to test new ideas or to disprove old ones. Even though science could deal with historical data or past situations, science is not quite a historical perspective and history is not as similar to science. There still are differences between the two matters. The sense of modern science entails that observations or facts manage the validity of generalizations or theories. Previous thoughts or thinking had often gone the opposite direction. Example of this was a situation that happened to Galileo Galilei.
Galileo was reminded of that previous direction when he was taken to Rome and condemned because his proposition regarding the sun as the center of the world and that it is permanent from its place is ridiculous for the reason that it is specifically opposing to Holy Scripture. The success and everyday application of modern biology, physics, chemistry, geology, and the other sciences is forceful proof of the validity of the modern approach. When dealing with Scientific Methods used in studying the nature of the world, one question still remains – Is Scientific Method considered as a Myth?
Several researches about this matter were conducted. Individuals wonder how science work and develop knowledge. The scientific method is usually used in two ways – one appropriate and one highly misleading. Regarding the appropriate use of scientific method, this process involves improvement of understanding. Individuals who use the phrase in this way may be criticizing assertive clinging to beliefs and prejudices, or appreciating careful and systematic reasoning about empirical evidence. Though this use may seem vague, the phrase can be more or less appropriate.
However, the phrase is also frequently used in a more definite sense – an entirely misleading sense, which involves a unique standard method which is essential to scientific progress. There is no such unique typical method because scientific progress requires many methods. There are several perspectives regarding the validity of the Scientific Method. There really are matters which are difficult to explain and think of. Scientific Method as a Myth could not be judged upon by using only information that individuals hold.
Fortunately, in using this kind of methodology, individuals are able to find several theories to several questions about the natural world and the occurrences that exist beneath the world. May it be a myth or the truth, what matters is that individuals make use of such methods to increase the development of human kind. If there is such a thing as a Scientific Method, there is also a Historical Method used to research and then to write histories in form of accounts of the past. It includes the techniques and guidelines by which historians use primary sources and other data.
There are various differences between the two methodologies. Historical Method deals with textual analysis, eyewitnesses and other data which could be reliable to their researches. The relationship with history, rationality, and objective, verifiable truth lies with the processes, data gathered and other matters involving these terminologies. History aims to find what is rational and truth about the past occurrences. What is true could only be seen when one researches or studies about it. Individuals judge rationality based on their own beliefs and traditions which are products of their history.
3. Thucydides, the father of political realism and scientific history conducted a study about the Peloponnesian War, a disparaging war which began in 431 B. C. among Greek city-states. He began writing one of his major works entitled “The History of the Peloponnesian War” during the start of war in 431 B. C. and continued his recordings regarding the events of war. It is composed of eight books. Book 1 aims to give a precise account of the war he considered the most substantial in human history, and to supply knowledge that he hoped would teach and guide future readers.
Book 2-4 states the major events in the first part of Archidamian War, Book 3 is about the revolt of Lesbos, Book 5 states the death of Brasidas and Cleon, Books 6 and 7 portray Nicias’ unfortunate expedition to Sicily, and the uncompleted eighth book is about the Athenian allies’ rebellion and the marine warfare close to Asia Minor. In one of his books, he stated that “This was indeed the greatest reverse by any Greek Army. They had come with the intention of enslaving others, and now found themselves in fear of enslavement themselves… and yet the pure scale of danger still hanging over them made all this seem bearable”.
This means something about the politics during his period and could also be applied in this moment. As an outcome of his study of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides depicted a fundamental division between the manner of politics within a certain state and the pattern of political interaction among several states. Citizens within a state would go through a community based on a form of social contract, which provides the protection of laws at the expense of individual freedom. As a result of the legal equality, the weak are able to resist the strong and ethical considerations are respected.
However, there are no laws that could defend the legality and morality of state interactions. Thucydides stated that “It is the strong who decides how the weak should be treated”. This shows how the balance of power happens between the states. The strong shall stay strong and the weak shall stay weak. This could also apply to the United States of America and its politics. Based upon the information said earlier, Thucydides may seem to be the father of a cruel realist view of international relations.
On the other hand, this does not necessarily mean that Thucydides himself encouraged the use of immorality of the international realm. Rather, if one chooses the difference between internal and external dealings in The Peloponnesian War, it becomes apparent that, Thucydides is prepared to make ethical judgments if he deals with the relations of individuals within the state. References Henry Ford, Interview in Chicago Tribune (May 25, 1916). Thucydides. 2009. History of the Peloponnesian War. Trans. By Martin Hammond. New York: Oxford.
Sample Essay of PapersOwl.com